check_availability

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Without annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses returns include weather info, booking links, calendar links, but lacks details on data freshness, rate limits, or any side effects. Behavior is adequately described for a simple read operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every part adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, but description explains return values. Parameter detail is in schema. Could mention that venue_id comes from find_nearby_courts (schema does, but description could for completeness). Overall adequate for a simple tool with many siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so descriptions are already in schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action 'check available padel court time slots' with specific resource and venue scope. Distinguishes from siblings like find_nearby_courts (find venues) and book_court (book slots).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied by the tool name and description, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_weekly_availability or find_available_games. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.